Trump making Putin happy (part 3): ‘Vladimir and I want elections in Ukraine!’

Putin has long talked about Zelensky's "lack of legitimacy" - in order to sow instability in Ukraine. And now Donald Trump agrees - why is difficult to understand.

BY MICHAEL ANDERSEN

As so often with Donald Trump, it all started with a rumor that seemed too bizarre to be true. But it was.

Tuesday afternoon, a FOX News White House correspondent, Jacqui Heinrich, tweeted that “diplomatic sources” had told her that the U.S. and Russian delegations in Saudi Arabia had agreed on a three-stage plan with “elections in Ukraine to be a key condition.” Importantly these elections would have to be held before the end of the war - “a ceasefire, elections in Ukraine, then signing of a final agreement.”

(Jacqui Heinrich’ tweet from Feb 18, 2025)

But, knowing what this would do to stability in Ukraine, and that the Ukrainian government would be vehemently opposed to such a timeline, even the FOX news correspondent considered this rumor too far-fetched to be real and added in her tweet - with big red alarm bells - that a U.S. source (she was standing in the White House at the time of tweeting) had “softened” this claim, meaning that it was ‘a political trial balloon.’

(Jacqui Heinrich’ tweet from Feb 18, 2025)

A few hours later, Heinrich got her chance to ask the U.S President directly about the rumor:

Question: ‘We are hearing that Russia wants to force Ukraine to hold new elections in order to sign any kind of a peace deal. Is that something that the U.S. would ever support?”

Answer: Well, we have a situation where we haven’t had elections in Ukraine, where we essentially have marshal law in Ukraine, where the leader, I hate to say it but he is down to 4% approval rating … and, yeah, I would say that when they want a seat at the table, wouldn’t the people of Ukraine have to say ‘like, you know, it’s been a long time since we have had an election.’ That’s not a Russia thing, that’s coming from me and from many other countries also.”

And just like that, what a few hours earlier had seemed too far-fetched and mad to even a FOX journalist was now the official policy of the Trump administration: The United States of America had joined the Russian demand for elections in Ukraine before a peace agreement can be signed. A demand that literally all neutral international experts describe as no more than a transparent Russian attempt to undermine Ukraine and its president. And it will probably not surprise you that Trump is lying when he claims that “many other countries also” demand such elections. Nobody else but Russia and the U.S. do (full disclosure: I have not managed to check with North Korea.)

For more than a year, the Russian dictator Vladimir Putin has been calling Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky “illegitimate” and stressed that he, Putin, does not recognize him as president of Ukraine. The official reason is that the presidential elections in Ukraine - which according to the constitution were supposed to have taken place in the Spring of 2024 - were postponed indefinitely. Putin, of course, doesn’t mention that the elections were postponed because he sent the Russian army to invade Ukraine. Or that there hasn’t been any real, internationally recognized elections in Russia since he took power there in 1999.

Of course, neither the Biden administration nor the European Union were fooled by the transparent Russian rhetoric. Exactly one year ago, The President of the EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen stated: “Concerning elections in Ukraine - this is a domestic matter of Ukraine, so not for me to comment.”

But the situation started changing in January when President Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, also started pushing for elections in Ukraine, potentially before the end of this year. And thereby, de facto, recognized Putin claim about Zelensky’s lack of legitimacy.

Keith Kellogg said in an interview with Reuters that presidential elections “need to be done.” Kellogg expressed some understanding that elections maybe can’t take place “right now”, but then he went on to say that “most democratic nations have elections in their time of war. I think it is important they [the Ukrainians] do so… I think it is good for democracy. That's the beauty of a solid democracy, you have more than one person potentially running.”

Both Kellogg and his boss have expressed expectations that the war will be over before the end of 2025. And reportedly, Kellogg’s strategy "involves Ukraine heading to the polls - in 2025 - following an initial truce with Russia, before the eventual winner negotiates a longer-term peace deal with Moscow.”

So, this is the situation as of Wednesday, February 19, 2025:

Fact no 1: a Russian dictator who himself has been in power since 1999 is upset that a democratically-elected president - whose country said dictator invaded, killing hundreds of thousands of people and forcing 10 million to flee their homes - has postponed elections till the war is over.

Fact no 2: said dictator who has never himself considered allowing free elections or free media in his 26 years in power, is worried about signing a peace agreement with this “illegitimate” Ukrainian President.

Fact no 3: the President of the United States of America now accepts the Russian dictator’s line of argument - despite the fact that the dictator’s agenda blatantly has nothing to do with democracy in Ukraine and everything to do with keeping as much as possible of Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has made it very clear that he disagrees; he insists that presidential and parliamentary elections can take place only after the war has ended and martial law has been lifted. And he did so again after Trump had given the Russian demand his backing.

In an interview last week, the Ukrainian leader explained how holding elections now would be outright dangerous for Ukraine:

“[In order to hold elections] We must either end martial law or suspend it. If we suspend martial law, we will lose the army…. without martial law, Ukraine’s military structure would be weakened, as soldiers would have the legal right to return home, and as a result combat readiness would decline. And the Russians will be pleased.”

Wednesday morning, the Chairperson of the Ukrainian Parliament Ruslan Stefanchuk summed it up best of all:

That Donald Trump is wrong (mildly put) when he claims that Zelensky’ approval rating is 4%, probably doesn’t surprise anybody. Trump is not only wrong but also exhibits a striking lack of understanding of the situation:

According to a number of polls from 2024, among the Ukrainians there is little appetite for holding presidential elections while the war is still going on. A poll by the International Republican Institute (IRI) from Winter 2024 concludes that 60% of Ukrainians oppose elections before peace, while other polls (by Kyiv International Institute of Sociology) say that 80 or even 85% of Ukrainians oppose such elections.

In fact, the Ukrainians are demonstrating a remarkable political maturity: Only 23% would vote for Zelensky today (halved from one year earlier) - but, as indicated above, no less than 60-85% still want him to stay in power till the war is over. Meaning that the average Ukrainian is perfectly capable of distinguishing between their own political wishes and the overall stability of the country, as they see it.

Zelensky is trusted by 57% of the Ukrainians, according to the results of a poll literally from February 19, 2025.

Even Ukrainians who do not plan to vote for Zelensky understand that his persona and bravery has been pivotal to the cohesion and survival of Ukraine, and that the ex-comedian dressed in his eternal army fatigues has been very efficient in keeping the international limelight on Ukraine.

Nobody can forget Zelensky’s Churchill-like answer to the U.S. offer of extracting him to safety during the first days of the invasion when it looked like Kyiv was about to fall to the Russians - “I need ammo not a ride.”

The downsides for Ukraine of being forced to hold elections are many. Which is, of course, exactly why the Kremlin is playing that card. This is typical Putin, typical KGB-spoiler tactics. Why the Trump administration is playing the same game is more difficult to fathom, not to say impossible.

I have consulted a range of experts and analysts, in person and reading their analyzes, and all agree that what Trump is suggesting would be politically disastrous for Ukraine.

This is a country and population in the middle of the most traumatic period in its history with 10 million people having been forced to flee their homes, 20% of their country occupied and hundreds of thousands of people killed. Imagine a political campaign and elections under such circumstances. Forced upon them by their invading neighbor and the country the Ukrainians thought was their main ally.

This is, according to experts, what would happen:

1) Just simply by agreeing with the Russian demand for elections, and adding his own lies about Zelensky having an approval rating of 4%, Trump is labeling Ukraine’s President as ‘illegitimate’ and undermining his authority. Putin is laughing out loud.

2) The logistical and security challenges of holding elections right now would be enormous (and expensive). In a situation where Russian missiles and bombs are targeting the civilian population of Ukraine, how can the authorities ensure the safety of millions of voters and tens of thousands of election officials at polling stations? This fact also rules out the presence of international election observers.

How would the hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian men and women currently at the front lines participate in a wartime ballot? “It would be unfair if those defending our land were denied the opportunity to vote,” Zelensky says.

Security concerns would also rule out staging anything resembling a normal election campaign; you couldn’t allow election rallies and public meetings, which would mean that such elections would not live up to internationally established democratic standards. And, again, this in itself would create the perfect opportunity for the Russian dictator and his propaganda machine to paint the elections as illegitimate.

Before you even would get that far, though, how would the Ukrainian authorities be able to conduct the necessary update of election registers and secure that all Ukrainians could vote? The Russian invasion has displaced four million Ukrainians internally and even more outside the country, and five million Ukrainians are left in Russian-occupied territories.

Without the participation of all these Ukrainians, a third of the population, an election would fail to meet democratic standards. In an analysis called ‘Why Ukraine’s Elections Can Wait’, Olga Onuch and Lucan Way conclude that such an ‘election’ “would systematically underrepresent those Ukrainians most directly affected by the war. Chosen by only a rump of the population, winners of such elections might be considered illegitimate by a large part of the population. And Russia would of course launch its accusations of illegitimacy in an effort to polarize Ukrainians and cast international doubt upon Ukraine’s democracy.

3) At the same time, Ukraine organizing elections without the voters in the occupied territories would immediately be trumpeted by the Kremlin as proof that Kyiv has accepted that these areas are no longer part of Ukraine. And Putin would undoubtedly use that claim in future peace negotiations.

4) As Zelensky has very low chances of holding on to his seat, he would in effect be a lame duck the minute elections were declared, and his authority would be gone. This is sweet music to Putin’s ears, of course. Again, why would the U.S. want this? And how does Washington think that this would help reach a lasting peace?

5) As is obvious from this, insisting on elections before a real peace has been reached, opens up Ukraine and the Ukrainians to massive Russian disinformation campaigns. Not least now when Trump – by closing USAID – is killing off many of Ukraine’s independent media; those small, local media which are so important in the often remote and poorer communities along the frontline, incidentally also here where Russian media and propaganda are the strongest.

6) Finally, even if elections did go ahead, all of the above factors would deliver to Putin - on a silver platter - the argument that ‘Zelensky is not the legitimate president’, which after elections would morph into ‘after that faulty election process, X is not the legitimate president of Ukraine, and therefore Russia dos not see itself obliged to...’

A dictator who has never lived up to any international agreement that he has signed, would have all he needs in order to disown any future peace agreement with Ukraine - when, if and how it suits him.

In fact, the Russian dictator has already launched that particular campaign. His spokes person Dmitri Peskov has repeated ad nauseam regarding peace talks that “we are proceeding from the assumption that the Ukrainian President does not have the right to hold such talks.”

In other words, because of the actions of Messrs. Trump and Kellogg, Putin who three years ago invaded Ukraine now gets to play the ‘bigger man’, declaring that he is “willing to negotiate with Zelensky despite his lack of legitimacy.”

Late Wednesday, to support his Russian colleague, Trump called the Ukrainian President “a Dictator without Elections, Zelensky better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left.”

There really is not much else to say after that.

Why on earth the Trump administration would want to sow insecurity and unpredictability in Ukraine in the run-up to negotiations is difficult to understand. I will look at that baffling question later this week, as well as other issues in a little series of sad articles called “Trump making Putin happy.”

You can find the previous part here:

Trump making Putin happy (part 2): Ukraine – the rape parallel